To think school handwriting font shouldn’t be used to communicate with parents

[Mumseesall]

My kids’ primary school have introduced a font for all communications that resembles joined up children’s handwriting. The news letter that goes out to all parents has recently been changed to this font and it’s really hard to read. I have to enlarge it to a huge size to find the information that I need and clearly the school staff have gone to some trouble to put in this letter for us so it is important. I’ve mentioned to the school that it would be helpful for all that the newsletter is in a font that everyone can read quickly and easily but the response has been that all comms will be in this font and that it’s to support the children with their handwriting - even comms that are for the parents and not the children. This makes no sense to me but perhaps I am missing something. Has anyone else come across this in other schools? Am I unreasonable to think that all communications should be in a clear font that’s easy to read?

Yanbu I hate font fuckwittery. We had a tool of a principal teacher who did everything in Comic Sans.

Is it Letterjoin by any chance? Ours does it too, I really struggled at first but it's been in play for a long while now and I'm used to it. I still prefer normal font in documents though.

Ask the school if they provide the newsletter in an alternative format for people with visual disabilities. They are obliged to be inclusive, are they not? This might help them realise the issue with the font.

FWIW, I used to work somewhere that insisted on the font being Arial 12 point, this being s good font for people with poor vision and also those with dyslexia, who can struggle to read other fonts.

Just to keep us on our toes, our school newsletter mixes between about four different fonts including that awful handwriting style one

It's also a complete waste of time because by the time they go to secondary no teacher gives a fuck about handwriting providing its legible. Also everything has to be written in biro.

It's really quite patronising to use a font designed for use with children to communicate with parents. I always used to despair at primary school letters in comic sans. It's kind of indicative of the entire attitude that schools take towards parents (and the expectation that they work with them).

I think, though, that this is often one if those things that happen in schools that no one has thought properly about so they keep bloody doing it. They've stopped being able to see how stupid it is.

I'm surprised you still get letters, everything is either Dojo or text messages at my children's schools.

They should be using the same font with parents as they do with professionals. Using Comic Sans etc is patronising.

Do they also do a pretend (adult) handwriting font for signatures?

Ugh. (to both of them!)

I'd be very suspicious of a company that thinks Anne Boleyn was married to Henry 7th and that Close is spelt with a Z and not an S

Our school do this too. The children all have to learn cursive handwriting now, another ridiculous Tory diktat, so to support them in that the school is doing everything cursive, including having to re-write all the displays.
I guess it shows support for the children, our school certainly isn't doing it for fun. And DDs Y6 teacher has also pointed out that as soon as she goes to big school, cursive handwriting will be irrelevant.
It's not as easy to read, but it only needs a bit more time. I'd support the school on this one.

I just don’t get the need to teach handwriting anymore, my son is in Year one excelling in everything apart from handwriting so he has to be in a lower set therefore the phonics etc isn’t stretching him. The only time one writes these days is a quick note to yourself or a birthday/Christmas card. I don’t see the need for cursive writing that can not be easily read.

Writing will be necessary for a long time to come so if parents cannot be bothered to teach handwriting and spelling then accept your child will be a dunce.

This isn’t about supporting children with handwriting, that’s a completely different issue - this is about whether information that is specifically for parents rather than children should be in a joined up handwriting font when it would be much easier to read if it was in a plainer font. Is there some connection with comms for parents being in joined up font somehow being beneficial to children? I don’t understand why?

I would complain. Isn't it a font for teaching how to do joined up writing?

Yes I think that’s the idea, that it’s to support the kids with learning to write - but as it’s used in letters to parents it doesn’t do that - it just makes it harder to read for us adults who are going a bit short sighted and having to squint at the page and enlarge in order to read it.

Might also want to mention it is very dyslexic unfriendly.

And to the Comic Sans haters - it happens to be very dyslexic friendly.

Aged, what is the company you're suspicious of?
No idea what you're talking about with Henry 7th but a 'cloze procedure' is a thing in teaching, so might not be a spelling mistake.

All documents should be in a font that is good for those with visual impairments, I was told arial, calibri or gil sans meets the criteria, times new roman is not recommended

Comic Sans is one of the very few fonts that has the 'a' written the way we teach kids to write it, i.e., not the way printed here. So it does get used a lot. Tell whoever produces Arial to change their 'a' (and keep the 'g' written the right way too) if you don't like it.

because by the time they go to secondary no teacher gives a fuck about handwriting providing its legible errr... yeah... that's kind of the point of primary... what was your point??

It’s a legal requirement to provide information in a way that can be read by anyone, you can’t read this font, therefore they need to provide it in a another

I've just had to do some mandatory training on accessible information. (work in a hospital). Patients are meant to be asked what help they need accessing information - braille, lip speaker (intrigued as to what that is), large print etc, and I think there might be some legislation on this? Surely, if you mention to them that you are not able to access the information they are giving you in that font, they might do something about it. Suggest they do training in how to make their information accessible.
If this font is so great, why are reading books not printed in it?

We had a tool of a principal teacher who did everything in Comic Sans.

It's the easiest font for dyslexics to read. Name calling the person who looks after your kids about their font choice is just pathetic.

Am I unreasonable to think that all communications should be in a clear font that’s easy to read?

This, however, is a perfectly valid reason- I would mention it.